Subject: Re: [xsl] is arity-based "polymorphism" safe to use in xsl 2.0 functions? From: Joern Nettingsmeier <nettings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:47:37 +0100 |
The spec allows you to write this because the designers thought it was useful, so go ahead and use it.
But I prefer the version at
http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#index-of-node
whew. two thirds shorter than mine. how depressing. :-D thanks for this very instructive pointer. must've overlooked it.
-- jvrn nettingsmeier
home://germany/45128 essen/lortzingstr. 11/ http://spunk.dnsalias.org phone://+49/201/491621
if you are a free (as in "free speech") software developer and you happen to be travelling near my home, drop me a line and come round for a free (as in "free beer") beer. :-D
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] is arity-based "polymorph, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] problem adding namespace node, Majirus FANSI |
RE: [xsl] php:join() equiv in XSL/X, Florent Georges | Date | Re: [xsl] FW: XSL-FO print of stati, G. Ken Holman |
Month |